Americans, as it turns out, are for the arts

I’m just back from another conference, this time hosted by Americans for the Arts. Some 1400 representatives arts organizations, foundations and community funds, arts service organizations, and local, state, regional, and national arts agencies gathered in Philadelphia for the 2008 annual conference.

As ever, the conference confirmed that the true value of such convenings is forged between and beyond the formal schedule — in unexpected meetings over coffee or in the bustling hallway, in side chatter in the back of the room while a panel presents badly projected and poorly designed PowerPoint slides at the front (red text on a dark background…good choice), and in the speed-networking possible when you can introduce, face to face, two close associates that don’t know each other but should (“Oh, you’re working on that topic, you really need to talk to Barbara in Cleveland, there she is, let me introduce you.”).

It continues to make me wonder what a conference would look like if it were optimized toward these absolute values.

But there was strong content in Philly, as well.

• Andrew Zolli did a great presentation on dynamic trends that will define our collective future (funny, engaging, personable, although essentially the same presentation he gave at Arts Presenters in January 2007). Spoiler alert: A big transformational dynamic is in how big our future world population will be, where they will live, and the proportion of pre- and post-wage-earners to those in the workforce.
• A smart bunch of panelists discussed the evidence of arts impact on communities and social issues — how they’re gathering it, how it can be framed, and why we can measure what seems to many to be immeasurable. Kudos, particularly, to Chris Dwyer of RMC Research for explaining the challenge and opportunities of thoughtful research so well, and to Mark Stern and Susan Seifert for their continuing work on the Social Impact of the Arts Project at UPenn.
• A blazingly brilliant panel — honestly, I had to squint — explored the commonly assumed ”leadership gap” now facing arts and culture…oh wait, I was on that panel. Perhaps I have a bias… Seriously, though, my panel partners Ximena Varela of Drexel University and Mitch Menchaca of the Arizona Commission were funny, bright, and wonderfully blunt about the realities of leadership diversity in the arts (Ximena) and the ”sink or swim” culture we tend to call ”leadership development” (Mitch). Thanks to the fabulous Cecelia Fitzgibbon of Drexel University for curating the conversation.

Finally, it occurred to me that the best way to galvanize a community is to have a common enemy. I therefore propose the launch of an arch nemesis to Americans for the Arts, tentatively titled ”Americans Against the Arts” or perhaps ”Americans Indifferent to the Arts.” Then, we’d really get some traction.

Oh, and a special shout-out to Paul Tyler from the ArtsKC Fund, who actually took the bold leap of adopting the Pecha Kucha PowerPoint rules for his conference presentation. Amy Kweskin blogged about it here. Props, Paul! May others be inspired by your example.